]> git.baikalelectronics.ru Git - kernel.git/commit
tools/memory-model: Model smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()
authorAndrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Mon, 3 Dec 2018 23:04:49 +0000 (15:04 -0800)
committerIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Mon, 21 Jan 2019 10:06:55 +0000 (11:06 +0100)
commit41ab8c344000e1f091a91522df75eee55b506086
tree6d9cedef7675a70de468ca9f6d8c874006f37a7d
parent581e80ca7e46b973cc7b040e069ac9f511c4dc0b
tools/memory-model: Model smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()

The kernel documents smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() the following way:

  "Place this after a lock-acquisition primitive to guarantee that
   an UNLOCK+LOCK pair acts as a full barrier.  This guarantee applies
   if the UNLOCK and LOCK are executed by the same CPU or if the
   UNLOCK and LOCK operate on the same lock variable."

Formalize in LKMM the above guarantee by defining (new) mb-links according
to the law:

  ([M] ; po ; [UL] ; (co | po) ; [LKW] ;
fencerel(After-unlock-lock) ; [M])

where the component ([UL] ; co ; [LKW]) identifies "UNLOCK+LOCK pairs on
the same lock variable" and the component ([UL] ; po ; [LKW]) identifies
"UNLOCK+LOCK pairs executed by the same CPU".

In particular, the LKMM forbids the following two behaviors (the second
litmus test below is based on:

  Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.html

c.f., Section "Tree RCU Grace Period Memory Ordering Building Blocks"):

C after-unlock-lock-same-cpu

(*
 * Result: Never
 *)

{}

P0(spinlock_t *s, spinlock_t *t, int *x, int *y)
{
int r0;

spin_lock(s);
WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
spin_unlock(s);
spin_lock(t);
smp_mb__after_unlock_lock();
r0 = READ_ONCE(*y);
spin_unlock(t);
}

P1(int *x, int *y)
{
int r0;

WRITE_ONCE(*y, 1);
smp_mb();
r0 = READ_ONCE(*x);
}

exists (0:r0=0 /\ 1:r0=0)

C after-unlock-lock-same-lock-variable

(*
 * Result: Never
 *)

{}

P0(spinlock_t *s, int *x, int *y)
{
int r0;

spin_lock(s);
WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
r0 = READ_ONCE(*y);
spin_unlock(s);
}

P1(spinlock_t *s, int *y, int *z)
{
int r0;

spin_lock(s);
smp_mb__after_unlock_lock();
WRITE_ONCE(*y, 1);
r0 = READ_ONCE(*z);
spin_unlock(s);
}

P2(int *z, int *x)
{
int r0;

WRITE_ONCE(*z, 1);
smp_mb();
r0 = READ_ONCE(*x);
}

exists (0:r0=0 /\ 1:r0=0 /\ 2:r0=0)

Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Jade Alglave <j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Cc: parri.andrea@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203230451.28921-1-paulmck@linux.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat
tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def